Parker's LONG sleeve undershirt in the Final Four

[Nevadaref]

During the Final Four, Candace Parker of Tennessee wore a white, LONG sleeve undershirt under her white team jersey due to a shoulder injury. We noticed it and made a couple of comments in the chatroom, but nothing substantive.

I did some checking into this and found that her undershirt should have been ruled illegal and that she should not have been allowed to participate while wearing it, but it seems that an exception can be made for a star player at the Final Four. Either the officials didn't know the rule or chose not to enforce it. Which makes one ask why even bother having such a rule in the book and why should the committee waste its time and effort wording such a change/clarification in the previous season?

There was a rule change for the 2006-07 season that prohibited this attire. Here is the text of the rule from that season as well as the current text from the 2007-08 NCAA rules book.

2006-07

Old Rule 3-5.13 and .14, 3-4.14, new page 72. Shirt sleeves may not extend below the elbow. Compression pants may not extend below the game pants.

Rule 3, Section 5
Art. 13. An undershirt is considered to be part of the game jersey and must
be a color similar to that of the game jersey. In addition, the sleeves and
neckline of undershirts shall be unaltered. (e.g., no cut-off sleeves or cut
necklines) Both sleeves shall be of the same length and not extend beyond the elbows. No logos, decorations, trim, commemorative patches, lettering or numbering may be used on an undershirt. An illegal undershirt shall not be worn.
A.R. 63. May a player remain in the game after being assessed an indirect technical foul for wearing an illegal undershirt or undergarment? RULING: Similar to the rule regarding jewelry, illegal undershirts or undergarments shall not be worn. The player shall leave the game and remove the illegal apparel; however, no technical foul shall be assessed.

2007-08

Rule 3, Section 5
Art. 11. An undershirt is considered to be part of the game jersey and must be a color similar to that of the game jersey. In addition, the sleeves and neckline of undershirts shall be unaltered. (e.g., no cut-off sleeves or cut necklines) Both sleeves shall be of the same length and not extend beyond the elbows. No logos, decorations, trim, commemorative patches, lettering or numbering may be used on an undershirt. An illegal undershirt shall not be worn.

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

During the Final Four, Candace Parker of Tennessee wore a white, LONG sleeve undershirt under her white team jersey due to a shoulder injury. We noticed it and made a couple of comments in the chatroom, but nothing substantive.

I did some checking into this and found that her undershirt should have been ruled illegal and that she should not have been allowed to participate while wearing it, but it seems that an exception can be made for a star player at the Final Four. Either the officials didn't know the rule or chose not to enforce it. Which makes one ask why even bother having such a rule in the book and why should the committee waste its time and effort wording such a change/clarification in the previous season?

There was a rule change for the 2006-07 season that prohibited this attire. Here is the text of the rule from that season as well as the current text from the 2007-08 NCAA rules book.

2006-07

Old Rule 3-5.13 and .14, 3-4.14, new page 72. Shirt sleeves may not extend below the elbow. Compression pants may not extend below the game pants.

Rule 3, Section 5
Art. 13. An undershirt is considered to be part of the game jersey and must
be a color similar to that of the game jersey. In addition, the sleeves and
neckline of undershirts shall be unaltered. (e.g., no cut-off sleeves or cut
necklines) Both sleeves shall be of the same length and not extend beyond the elbows. No logos, decorations, trim, commemorative patches, lettering or numbering may be used on an undershirt. An illegal undershirt shall not be worn.
A.R. 63. May a player remain in the game after being assessed an indirect technical foul for wearing an illegal undershirt or undergarment? RULING: Similar to the rule regarding jewelry, illegal undershirts or undergarments shall not be worn. The player shall leave the game and remove the illegal apparel; however, no technical foul shall be assessed.

2007-08

Rule 3, Section 5
Art. 11. An undershirt is considered to be part of the game jersey and must be a color similar to that of the game jersey. In addition, the sleeves and neckline of undershirts shall be unaltered. (e.g., no cut-off sleeves or cut necklines) Both sleeves shall be of the same length and not extend beyond the elbows. No logos, decorations, trim, commemorative patches, lettering or numbering may be used on an undershirt. An illegal undershirt shall not be worn.

I thought the same thing. It did look odd. For gamesmanship, if I was Stanford, I'd have a player wear the same.

Clarence

[Back In The Saddle]

And here I thought it was only the NFHS that had such an unending fascination for fashion police stuff. Why should anybody really care if a player wants to wear a long sleeved undershirt?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by msavakinas

i don't claim to follow women's basketball, but maybe she got it approved because of her shoulder being hurt like it was?? I dunno how it would help but just a thought.

You just made my point. If there was some sort of exemption granted/decision made to set aside this VERY CLEARLY STATED rule for this particular player, then there is no reason to even bother having the rule in the first place.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

You just made my point. If there was some sort of exemption granted/decision made to set aside this VERY CLEARLY STATED rule for this particular player, then there is no reason to even bother having the rule in the first place.

More or less the same thing Bob Knight recently said about "the walking rule."

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

More or less the same thing Bob Knight recently said about "the walking rule."

Yep, the sentiment is that there has to be some reasonable expectation that what is written in the rules will actually be called. Unless this is the way it is actually done in practice, then any decision of an official becomes capricious and open to question. Why call that, but not this? Why now, but not then? Why against this team, but not that one. The coaches and players are simply put at a loss and left wondering.

Hence the recent and heavy emphasis from the administrations of the NBA, the NCAA, and the NFHS to call the rules as written and NOT inject personal philosophies into the game.

[Dan_ref]

I'm not going to look it up or post it but there's an ncaa ruling/bulletin that states the dress rules that you so kindly posted in mulit-font/multi-color are unenforceable if there's a medical condition that applies.

So...if the coach said yeah, there's a medical reason that she needs to wear whatever you posted in bold red letter large font then yeah, it's legal.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

I'm not going to look it up or post it but there's an ncaa ruling/bulletin that states the dress rules that you so kindly posted in mulit-font/multi-color are unenforceable if there's a medical condition that applies.

So...if the coach said yeah, there's a medical reason that she needs to wear whatever you posted in bold red letter large font then yeah, it's legal.

It must not have been a problem. She was not wearing this for cosmetic reasons. She did separate her shoulder twice during the tournament.

Peace

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

I'm not going to look it up or post it but there's an ncaa ruling/bulletin that states the dress rules that you so kindly posted in mulit-font/multi-color are unenforceable if there's a medical condition that applies.

So...if the coach said yeah, there's a medical reason that she needs to wear whatever you posted in bold red letter large font then yeah, it's legal.

Dan.......I'm thinking that this rule is in place if they feel they need to enforce it for the right reason, yet when someone such as Parker needs an exception due to an injury it's allowable in the eyes of the officials. I don't follow though how the long sleeve would help her shoulder. It appeared to be somewhat loose fitting.

Could she be allowed to be wrapped like a mummy?

It did look odd, as I've never seen long sleeves before.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

You just made my point. If there was some sort of exemption granted/decision made to set aside this VERY CLEARLY STATED rule for this particular player, then there is no reason to even bother having the rule in the first place.

Let me quote:

"Therefore, it is important to know the intent and purpose of a rule so that it may be intelligently applied in each play situation. A player of a team should not be permitted an advantage which is not intended by a rule. Neither should play be permitted to develop which may lead to placing a player at a disadvantage not intended by a rule."

So, the rule is there for a reason....you've got to not only know the rule but why the rule exists. Any given rule is not necessarily meant to be applied in a vacuum. This rule is one of them. They are there for a reason....and prohibiting medical aids that are not unsafe is not the reason.

[rockyroad]

As i understand it, she was wearing some sort of shoulder brace that had straps that went under and around her upper arm, so the sleeves were there to cover those straps and keep everything covered up...and there was permission granted based on medical needs - as Dan already pointed out, that's the way the NCAA handles it. And not just for Parker. We had a D-III player in this area who had medical permission to wear long sleeves due to some kind of skin condition on her arms.

[lpbreeze]

I don't know if anyone mentioned it but OJ Mayo was wearing socks with the NBA logo during the first round game

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by lpbreeze

I don't know if anyone mentioned it but OJ Mayo was wearing socks with the NBA logo during the first round game

And what does that mean? This is not illegal.

Peace

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

As i understand it, she was wearing some sort of shoulder brace that had straps that went under and around her upper arm, so the sleeves were there to cover those straps and keep everything covered up...and there was permission granted based on medical needs - as Dan already pointed out, that's the way the NCAA handles it. And not just for Parker. We had a D-III player in this area who had medical permission to wear long sleeves due to some kind of skin condition on her arms.

Then why did she need the sleeves to go below the elbow? Why not cover the upper arm and also comply with the rule?

Originally Posted by Bearboy

We've had this situation a couple of times in girls HS.

My intent with this thread was to discuss the NCAA rule, not HS. The HS situation has nothing to do with this. The NFHS book does NOT include language similar to the NCAA one which specifically prohibits the sleeves extending past the elbow.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

When watching, I just assumed the rule was the same as for high school.

I was thinking the same thing until I checked into it. That is why I started this thread and posted what I found. It was my belief that many people probably were unaware of the precise wording of the NCAA rule. Clearly it is different from the HS ranks.

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

I'm not going to look it up or post it but there's an ncaa ruling/bulletin that states the dress rules that you so kindly posted in mulit-font/multi-color are unenforceable if there's a medical condition that applies.

So...if the coach said yeah, there's a medical reason that she needs to wear whatever you posted in bold red letter large font then yeah, it's legal.

So basically what I wrote yesterday is accurate. If some kind of exemption/decision was made to allow this player to wear such, then why bother having that rule in place?
Also, I don't see how a long sleeve undershirt is medically necessary for an injured shoulder. That's just silly. Then again so is the NCAA enforcement policy, if what you say about the bulletin is true.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

So basically what I wrote yesterday is accurate. If some kind of exemption/decision was made to allow this player to wear such, then why bother having that rule in place?
Also, I don't see how a long sleeve undershirt is medically necessary for an injured shoulder. That's just silly. Then again so is the NCAA enforcement policy, if what you say about the bulletin is true.

No, what you wrote is absolutely inaccurate - what is inaccurate is your interpretation of the rule. A medical condition over-rides what you think is in the ncaa dress rules, as do religious considerations. Whether you believe that a particular exemption due to a medical condition is silly or not is 100% irrelevant. Your vote does not count, all you need to do is to get confirmation from the coach that a medical condition applies and tell the announcer to play the anthem, announce the players and then start the game. Pretty simple (even for you).

As for whether an exemption/decision might be part of the process... I'm guessing you threw that in without thinking about the words so I'll give you a pass.

In any event you're boring the sh1t out of me so I'll just leave you to your uneducated rants. Have fun.